Is this man really up to being Home Secretary?

The papers are full of sour assessments of Jacqui Smith's tenure at the Home Office. Yet her handling of the only major security crisis i her tenure was exemplary. And despite having half her department taken over by Jack Straw, she more than held her own in dealing with the day-to-day crises that overpower home secretaries. Where she was let down was in being forced by Downing Street to rerun the 42-day detention saga, without the necessary support, and in a failure to engage with the unelected pundits who decide whether you're any good or not. In her ten years as a minister, her talents shone through to those who saw her in action (as in dealing with the 2005 Schools Bill) but she was dealt a difficult hand with a castrated Home Office that always made her task that bit harder.

But I defy anyone who criticises Jacqui Smith to explain how her Conservative alternative, Chris Grayling, would be an improvement. Where David Davis set the standard for opposition, and Dominic Grieve had at least a decent pedigree in human rights, Chris Grayling's dull ineptitude is another indictment of David Cameron's personnel judgment. Can anyone think of a single thing Grayling has said of note since he took on the job? Grayling's inability to string a few gracious words together yesterday - in contrast to his Lib Dem opposite number - beyond the patronising repetition of Smith being 'a woman' sits ill with anyone who has hopes of high office. How, exactly, is this man supposed to think on his feet in a post that moves from crisis to crisis with unerring regularity?

The idea that he might be our Home Secretary is truly shocking.

MPs wanted: no human beings need apply

It may not be fashionable to say so, but the news that Jacqui Smith and Alastair Darling are likely to be out of the cabinet as a result of the never-ending expenses saga is a cause for concern rather than rejoicing. I have known both for a long time, and I know both to be able, dedicated, honest people, who came into politics to make a difference and have been talented ministers in their time with the Labour government - I know in particular how much difference Jacqui made on schools policy, and her talents are sorely missed at education these days. But Jacqui has stronger support in Redditch than people think, as her result in 2005 (where there was no swing against Labour) showed and I hope she can keep her seat.

But there is a wider point here. The BBC poll today tells us that half the public thinks that at least half of MPs' are 'corrupt'. And there is no doubt that the last month has been a positive boon for the white van man/saloon bar world view, harnessed by the BNP/UKIP axis no doubt to shocking proportions this Thursday.

In the process, nobody wants to stand up for politicians. Of course, there are a few who have milked the system shamelessly and they deserve whatever they get. (I don't believe that includes either Darling or Smith - as both got caught out primarily because of a 2004 rule change affecting ministers and their designation of second home). Most MPs claimed allowances to which they were told they were entitled, and were not trying to milk the system.

And the Telegraph coverage has now lost all sense of proportion: listening to Frank Cook's apology for a claim (that was rejected) for a £5 church donation ending up in the Fees Office did not suggest someone trying to fiddle the system but an MP whose office has patently made a silly mistake. He did not deserve to see his 26 years in parliament turned into a piece of faux Sunday newspaper outrage. Was this really Sunday's biggest news?

Fewer and fewer people were willing to enter politics for the money, even with the allowances as they were. Most of those across all parties have worked for years, often at considerable personal cost, building up local support to become an MP because they believe in democratic politics and the contribution they might make to their community or causes.

They work incredibly hard in their constituencies dealing with expectations that have grown as their collective reputation has declined. As David Aaronovitch says today, if they are guilty of anything, it is not realising the impact of what John Keane calls 'monitory democracy' - the onslaught of Freedom of Information, the Internet, 24 hour news and new technology. Few of the political giants of the past would stand a day's scrutiny under this system, let alone years of it.

So, there will be changes to the systems of expenses, and there may be some democratic reforms too - though they should be done with cross-party support, not the shameless self-interest of some party leaders. But in the end we still need people to want to become MPs because we need people who are willing to make huge sacrifices to their personal life (and for most, becoming an MP means you have little time for much else) to do so.

What we are now likely to get as a result of the relentless assault of the last month are humourless self-righteous sorts who are, of course, incapable of making the slightest mistake. In such circumstances, the only person who would want to be an MP is someone with no hinterland or human frailties, or an egomaniac extremist who plays to the populist mood.

If people don't think much of our current MPs, just wait until they see what comes next.

This post was picked up by the Local Democracy blog.

Some good news in the polls

Today's Sunday Times/YouGov poll shows the Tory lead reduced to seven points and a boost in Gordon Brown's personal ratings. It now needs Alastair Darling to do the goods with the Budget to consolidate this position. I've been surprised by the sourness of the Tory reaction this week: it is all-advised.

But the Government also needs to show the confidence that has been on display at the G20 this week across other policy areas: Labour has much stronger welfare and health policies than the Tories and should say so; on education, Labour academies are showing the way forward but they are not being promoted by Labour 'children's ministers' whose message on education has been lost in recent months. Here too, Labour must regain the initiative, not least in the wake of LSC incompetence over college and post-16 funding.

On a separate note, it is encouraging to see that voters have a saner attitude towards the whole issue of MP funding - and Jacqui Smith in particular - than has been exhibited in the sexist bile dumped on the Home Secretary in recent weeks. But Gordon Brown must sort the expenses issue out quickly if it is not to become a running sore that damages the government and not just the public perception of MPs.

The corrosion of politics

I'm with Hopi Sen on the ludicrously overblown 'Jacqui Smith affair' and I also think David Aaronovitch (as ever) gets to the heart of the matter. But I do worry about the corrosive effect all this talk of MPs' expenses has on people's already low opinion of politics and politicians. In part, it is the absurd media reporting which conflates staffing costs with MPs' salaries and expenses, as in some of last night's TV news. In part, it is a side effect of the greater transparency wrought by FoI and other changes. And it also seems as if it may be the result of corrupt dealings and disgraceful leaking by someone close to the Fees Office.

But it is also a product of the way in which the expenses system is constructed as a poor substitute for salaries. Gordon Brown needs to get together with his fellow party leaders to sort this out quickly, whether through single payments that are taxed or through attendance allowances which could cover a hotel bill and meals. One way or another, these needs sorting....and quickly.

A good night for Labour and Jacqui Smith

Luke Akehurst reports as ever on Thursday's by-elections. Amongst some generally encouraging results are two brilliant ones in Jacqui Smith's Redditch constituency, confirming her formidable campaigning powers and suggesting that the Tories will find it tough to defeat her in the general election, despite Redditch's marginality.

But then it is worth remembering that the swing to the Tories in Redditch in 2005 was precisely zilch.

Police tactics may be heavyhanded, but no Home Secretary can start issuing apologies until the case is over

Imagine for a second that John Reid, Home Secretary at the time, had hit the airwaves to attack the heavyhanded actions of the police after they launched their dawn raid on a senior female Downing Street adviser, before arresting her in the cash for honours affair. That he might have been justified in thinking the actions wholly disproportionate - as her subsequent exoneration proved and those who knew her believed at the time - is beside the point. He would have been wrong actively to intervene during an active investigation. And I'm pretty sure the Tories would have been the first to say so.

The same is true of Jacqui Smith today with respect to the arrest of Damian Green. She should not and cannot take the course of action being advised by David Cameron and 'condemn' the police, nor indeed can Gordon Brown, though he could do more publicly to uphold the rights of MPs. And Smith certainly cannot start issuing apologies until the matter is closed. Whatever we may think about the police actions in this case - and I share the views of my former boss on these matters - no Home Secretary can get in the business of trying to take operational control of the police. Were they to do so, we would then be living in an authoritarian state. And I seriously doubt that any of those claiming that we are now living in a police state realise what that really means: for a start, we certainly wouldn't be hearing their claims on the airwaves.

Harriet Harman is right to say that there should be a review of procedures to develop much clearer protocol for police seizing MPs' files and computers, especially in the Houses of Parliament. But David Cameron and would-be Home Secretary Dominic Grieve are utterly wrong to suggest that either Jacqui Smith or Gordon Brown should intervene to overrule or rebuke the police in this case, just as they would have been wrong to do so - however unjustified the action seemed to many of us - when the police took similar action before. When this case is over - or if it is decided not to press charges against Green - there should certainly be a proper review of police tactics in this and similar cases. But not before.

The arrest of Damian Green

The arrest of Damian Green seems to be the latest in the heavyhanded approach of the police to politicians and those working in politics.

I don't recall hearing much outraged comment about 'heavy-handed' police tactics from the likes of Michael Howard and David Cameron when some of Tony Blair's advisers were arrested in even more bizarre circumstances, subsequently to be exonerated. And it is utterly disreputable of the Tory duo to suggest that the Home Secretary is lying when she inisists she was not involved in the police being called in to investigate leaks in the Home Office: the Tories have embarked on a strategy of shouting unfounded accusations as loudly as possible as a substitute for serious policy, as was evident earlier this week on the PBR.

Nevertheless, it does seem bizarre that the police have chosen to arrest an MP on this issue, as none of the documents cited in the papers today would appear to have had national security implications. And if charges are not made, the Metropolitan Police should be much clearer about why they made this arrest (rather than simply questioning Green if they needed to do so) and explaining the criteria they use before making such arrests for the future.

Labour is getting it right on key issues

Today's Sunday Telegraph poll may confirm the dismal findings of earlier recent polls. But within today's Sunday papers, there is also a very clear sign that the government is getting it right on three of the most important policy areas.

First, the government is right to want to have the precautionary maximum 42-day detention period. Jacqui Smith gave a characteristically fluent account of the measure this morning. But its best defence comes from Matthew D'Ancona in the Sunday Telegraph. And the measure is supported by a majority of the public.

Second, Alan Johnson delivers a cracking case for his plans for more extensive GP surgeries and polyclinics in the Observer. The idea that it is worse for patients to be able to get an X-Ray or ECG on site, or to get minor injuries dealt with locally rather than hanging about for four hours in A&E, is such common sense that once delivered, patients will wonder what the fuss was about.

And third, the Government's plan to push for a rapid turnaround of underperforming schools with the support of successful heads and a big extension of Academies is exactly what is neededd for such schools. To those who say 'the government should have done this sooner', ministers can point to the fact that where one in two schools used to get 30% or fewer five good GCSEs, the figure is now one in five. But one reason why this policy is superior is its use of floor targets, one of the most successful policies of the last ten years, accompanied by structural reform.

What these three policies also have in common is that they are opposed by the Conservatives. Aside from Lord Tebbit and Ann Widdecombe, the 42 days are publicly opposed by the party. Tory health policy is being shamefully written by the BMA. And on education, the Tories would scrap targets, even when they are so patently a lever for improvement - and for pushing the sort of structural reform with which, at least, they share Labour's ambition.

The more the government can show the sense of purpose evident today, the more likely it is that they can recover their poll position. If, in the process, the bareness of Cameron's policy cupboard is also exposed, that would be no bad thing.

Jacqui for leader?

Daniel Finkelstein and Nick Robinson report a flurry of interest in Jacqui Smith following her splendid performance at the PLP last night. Of course, any speculation that one is set to be leader can be the kiss of death, not least with Team Brown. But it is good the media are now starting to see the Jacqui Smith that those of us who worked with her down the years already know: a woman who combines the down-to-earth experience of a former schoolteacher and a mum with a steely determination and excellent political antennae. Her promotion to the cabinet was later than it deserved to be, but owed much to her work on the 2005 schools bill, which gave her great kudos in no.10 and saw her becoming chief whip. But before then, she had built considerable experience in a host of Whitehall departments. Her steel was on show recently when she calmly dealt with the rude reception she received from the police trade union. Don't forget too that in the last general election, she managed to ensure that there was no swing to the Conservatives in her Redditch seat, though her share of the vote fell by just under 1% (although it is now target no 42 for the Tories). This at a time when 'safer' seats than hers were falling. And although the commentariat have been slow to recognise it - not least because of an unseemly turf war with Jack Straw - this blog has long recognised her strength. But I'm not going to join those saying that Jacqui should be the next leader of the Labour Party. Only because I don't want to scupper her chances.

Anatomy of a 'gaffe' in today's press

Jacqui Smith's advisers probably shouldn't have mentioned her trip to a Peckham kebab shop, given that she would have had her protection officer with her. But the idea that it is a gaffe for a woman to say that she would not walk about a strange inner city area alone at midnight (although she happily does so in areas she knows) - even if she does happen to be Home Secretary, albeit the latest Labour one to be presiding over falling crime levels - tells us a lot more about the fatuousness of the British press and our main Opposition party than it does about Jacqui Smith. Would it have been better had Ms Smith declared (presumably to widespread derision) that, of course, she would happily walk the alley ways and back streets of Hackney late at night? And perhaps rent-a-quote David Davis, who ought to have more sense than to dub an honest response 'shameful', could explain to us in which halcyon age it was 'safe' for a woman to do so? Of course, there will be lots of fearless lone women walking the back alleys of London through the night once the Tories are in power. Just as they did in the 1980s, didn't they?

Jacqui shows her mettle

There were those who were beginning to doubt the wisdom of Gordon Brown in promoting Jacqui Smith so quickly to Home Secretary. This blog has never had such doubts, and yesterday's bravura performance showed why. Where her predecessors failed to get the better of her incredibly self-important shadow David Davis, Jacqui did so with ease. As to the substance of the charges against her, that she didn't rush to hold a press conference to announce every problem she encountered in the Home Office - as the normally sane Danny Finkelstein would have her do - she had a good riposte: "My approach was that the responsible thing to do was to establish the full nature and scale of the problem and take appropriate action to deal with it, rather than immediately to put incomplete and potentially misleading information in the public domain." That is not to deny her responsibility to inform the public, but it is to say that the job of ministers is to give leadership in sorting out problems rather than forever wringing their hands about them. The idea that every cabinet minister should spend their whole time holding press conferences for the gratification of the Daily Mail and the Tories about the difficulties that are brought to their attention on a weekly if not daily basis - save where there is a genuine risk to the public or a case of impropriety - is a recipe for anarchy, not good government. And I can't say I remember such regular confessionals when the Tories were last in power, either.

Jacqui Smith's baptism of fire

I have never understood why Jacqui Smith went unnoticed in the government for quite so long. I first worked with her when she joined the Department for Education and Skills in 1999 as a junior schools minister. Her ability was outstanding then, and her stature grew with a series of second-tier ministerial posts in Labour's second term. Jacqui's real breakthrough only came thanks to the rebellion on Tony Blair's school reforms, when her calm good sense and can-do attitude was seen by many of my number 10 colleagues. She was promoted to the Cabinet as chief whip. Her appointment as Home Secretary last week was the best bit of Gordon Brown's reshuffle, and she has certainly had the mother of all inductions to contend with. But as her interview on the Today programme this morning demonstrated, she is the right person for these troubled times.